Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-10-18
HOME AFFAIRS.
WORKMAN KILLED BY FALLING
BUILDING.
Patents to Mexican Grants-The
Crow Indians-West Virginia
Murderers-Etc.
ESPECIAL DISPATCHES TO tbs RrooRp-us1osl
AN IMPORTANT CASE.
a Suit Involving the Stability of Patents
to Mexican Grants


to Mexican Grants
Copyright 1857 by te California -4ssociated Press.1
!. WASHINGTON, October 17th.-TSpecial i
Aae Supreme Court to-day decided to ad
vance for hearing the case of the United
states VS.. the San Jacinto Tin Company, of
California. Arguments will be heard some
time in January, although no date in that
month has been specifically fixed by the
Court. The determination of this case is
OF greater Importance TO California than
any other on the docket of the Court. The
questions involved in the suit are of a pub
lie character, ana affect the title to all
lands held under Mexican grants in Cali
fornia. Nearly 800 600 people are now re-
siding upon the lands originally contained
within the limits of Mexican grants con-
trmed by the Board of Land Commits
sloners under the treaty of Guadaloupe
Hidago.
While the United States brings this suit
on appeal, in point of fact the contest is
carried on in the interest of parties who
deny the validity of the grant TO the San
Jaclnto lin Company, who held a patent
for eleven square leagues of land in San
Bernardino county.
Senator William NJ. Stewart, of counsel
tor the company, moved to advance the
hearing, on the ground that it is a test case.
IN which the question is raised whether the
Attorney General can institute suits to set
aside patents granted on findings made by
the Board Of Land Commissioners. whose de-
cisions have been confirmed by the United
States Courts, without authority expressly
conferred by an Act of Congress- The At
torney- General interposed no objection to
advancing the case.
The counsel for the San Jacinto company
hat fha
termination of the questions involved
particularly as to the power of the At.
torney- General, without further legislation
by Congress, to open and relitigate private
land claims of CalifOrnia-is of momentous
interest to the State.
Accompanying the petitioners brief is q
letter from Governor Waterman, trans
mitting two petitions. One. signed bv 143
citizens, owners and residents of a Mexican
land grant known as the Las Pulgas Ranch.
asking the President to set aside an order
OF the Attorney General permitting inter
es.ed parties TO commence proceedings to
set aside the patent to said grant. The
other is the petition of members of the bar
OF California, stating various reasons why
certain suits to set aside patents to Mexican
land claims in California should not be
prosecuted.
In the case of the United States VS.. Flint.
in the Circuit Court of California, decided
in 1876 Justice Field rendering the opinion.
the Court held that title to lands confirmed
by the Board of Land Commissioners
under Mexican grants could not be lnval-
ldated in the manner proposed under this
section. Justice Field said
Where the District Attorney OF this District
obtains authority to institute in the name of
the United States, suits for the purposes we are
not informed. There is no law of Congress
which requires or allows it, and we have sought
In vain for the power of the Acknowledgement to
direct It, That officer can, it is true institute or
direct the institution of suits for the revocation
and cancellation of patents Of lands belonging
to the United States issued upon false and
fraudulent representation to the executive
officers of the Land Department, or upon the
msconstruction of law but that is a very differ
ent matter from instituting or directing pro-
&c dlngs to vacate recall patents founded
upon DEGREES of the Commission or Court exer-
cising a special and exclusive Jurisdiction.
Those DEGREES establish the obligation of the
United States to claimants under the treaty and
II the Legislative Department which authorized
the proceedings before the Commission and
Court be satisfied with the result, IL is difficult
to see upon what pretense the Attorney General
can seek to disturb il,